Final Exam

Final Activity A3.1, p. 385

We tried to divide into groups according to assignment and I and Tam were a team and here is the
result we have.

Preparation
1. Prepare the criteria and trends that North American consumers have in common with the global, and
style the wants of North American consumers in a way that best suits the world.

2. Using the most collaborative attitude to show the rest of the team that Europe has met many of the
needs of multiple cultures, in addition to meeting the needs of the global expansion of consumer
spending for both North America and the whole world. Use as much evidence as possible to convince
the opinion of the other team.

3. Because it is global, there will be more powerful competitors, but global consumers are big bread, so
in order to meet global consumers, cooperation will sometimes support a lot of access to different
cultures.

4. We will support the other team to give their opinions and negotiate until both parties reach an
agreement but the bottom line will still require advertising and bringing the product to be sold globally.

During the meeting

1/ Watch how the interaction between your team and the other proceeds

During the meeting, the interaction between my team and the other is kinda strong during the meeting,
each team not only showed their strength but also raised questions and giving their own ideas that help
in building MHC future marketing policy. In terms of my team, we bring up a plan for global marketing
approach includes characteristics, tactics and the possibility when doing this global concept. We also
suggested that it would be better if two companies could collab, the MHC American would take
responsibility for the production of kitchen equipment. This will make the quality MHC products in the
global more intensive. I felt helped that my team point out the high visibility and advantages that will
improve the turnover and the image of the company in the long-term. About the MHC ‘American, they
mainly focus on the production of all the products sold in the US. Because of that, they raised a lot of
questions, wondering the chance of global marketing approach. They seemed to object our team
opinion when they afraid of the risk and the danger of losing the housing market.

2/ A key moment when the interest of both two parties came to conflict.

The conflict happened when our team show changes are taking place in consumers purchasing patterns
when there was an increased in international consumption. So we thought this is a good chance to
switch from local to global marketing approach. However, MHC American possessed our strategy by
aiming our small turnover and boosting their distribution channels. They seemed surprised and a little
bit of contempt. Sometimes they used an unfriendly tone of voice to speak and ignore our words. My
team recognized their behaviours, we keep calm and tried to ease the problem, showing our best
outcomes for all parties. I think our team handled well when we were not affected by their behaviours
and still keeping our confidence. It came out that they finally understood our ideas and sorry for their
attitude

3/ Note any examples from your team empathy and mindfulness

As I mentioned before, when the other teams showed their objection, our team recognized and
awarded that. We solve the problem by monitoring the dialogue, dealing with conflicts in a clear way.
We showed our empathy when they said that they afraid of the risks and then use appropriate verbal
communication to explain and persuade. I think that when the opposite team saw our understanding,
they would realise the main concern and we can establish meaningful relationships

4/ How closely did the group follow the negotiating strategy prepared beforehand. How do you account
for any changes made to the strategy?

Although there were some changes during the meeting, my group still followed the planned negotiating
strategy of about 75-85%. Because the careful preparation so when the problems came, we could fix it
nicely. The strategy is clear and flexible, besides, our team also thought about possible difficulties that
could happen, providing some options. It can say that we stick to our plan really well.

5/ To what extent do you think the goal of the meeting was reached by the end.

The goal of the meeting was nearly reached by the end- clarifying issues, set direction, highlighting the
strategies, sharpen focus and move objective forward. The only issue left behind in my opinion that is
the ways of thinking in MHC American groups when they didn't really pay attention to changes in
consumption patterns and not absolutely supported the final decision. Although we said that we already
came to the final decision, it still confused and indefinite. The relationship between two teams overall is
normal, after the meeting each team understood more about the others and showed respect and
empathy

6/ What do you think should be the next step in the deliberations between two parties?

In my point of view, there shouldn’t have any deliberation or go back and forth. Two companies needed
to sum up all important ideas looked at main goals and purpose then go forth with the decision. If we
spend ages with deliberation, nothing is going to change. Two groups should come to a united goal,
clear purpose and then make a decision. You can change your mind after you’ve made a decision. It does
not have to be the ‘right’ decision, but we tend to fear we will not be able to cope with the
repercussions of a ‘wrong’ turn, so we stall and avoid choosing.